PROVIDENCE — Federal prosecutors are asking that developer Richard P. Baccari’s case be allowed to head to trial in court papers that lay out in his once lawyer’s own words how the bribery scandal that...

By Katie Mulvaney

PROVIDENCE — Federal prosecutors are asking that developer Richard P. Baccari’s case be allowed to head to trial in court papers that lay out in his once lawyer’s own words how the bribery scandal that landed three North Providence councilmen in jail unfolded.

In asking U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell to let Baccari’s charges stand, prosecutors detail longtime lawyer Robert S. Ciresi’s testimony before a grand jury last summer.

A transcript of the testimony indicates that Ciresi repeatedly refused to testify against his former client, Baccari, citing his right against self incrimination. That changed last July when then-Chief U.S. District Judge Mary M. Lisi compelled him to testify. With prosecutors’ backing, Lisi extended him immunity from prosecution for anything he said as long as he told the truth.

A jury convicted Ciresi, 80, in 2011 on bribery, extortion, and conspiracy charges related to a scheme to purchase the votes of three North Providence town councilmen: John A. “Zam” Zambarano, Raymond L. Douglas III and Joseph S. Burchfield. Douglas, Zambarano, Burchfield and another middleman, Edward Imondi, pleaded guilty to their crimes and were sentenced to prison.

Providence real estate developer Baccari and his company, Churchill & Banks, were indicted in October on conspiracy and bribery charges related to the alleged scheme — following Ciresi’s grand jury testimony. They have pleaded not guilty.

According to Ciresi’s grand jury testimony, he was Baccari’s lawyer in summer 2008 as the developer sought zoning changes to build a supermarket on a former junkyard. Ciresi had been a sole practitioner for 52 years and had served 26 years as the North Providence solicitor.

Ciresi arranged in October 2008 for small groups of councilmen to meet with Baccari and engineers so they could see what the project would look like if approved, he said. Zambarano asked him after one such meeting if he thought Baccari would make a “political donation” to him.

“It was not your understanding that the payment you gave on [Feb. 10, 2009] was actually a political donation, correct?” Assistant U.S. Attorney John P. McAdams asked. “No. I thought it wasn’t a political donation,” Ciresi said.

“It was a bribe?” McAdams said. Yes, Ciresi said.

Ciresi met with Zambarano at Baccari’s Providence office; Baccari asked him to leave the room, Ciresi testified. “Before that meeting, I didn’t think anything was wrong. He was going to ask for a political donation,” he said.

Baccari later told him that Zambarano wanted a payoff for the project, Ciresi said. At first Zambarano was looking for $25,000 to secure the votes, but then he upped that to $50,000 without an explanation. Ciresi passed that news along to Baccari.

The council meeting took place Feb. 10, 2009. Ciresi presented the plans at the meeting that won council approval. Ciresi drove to Antonio’s Restaurant in Cranston afterward to get something to eat. The restaurant was closed so he headed home.

Zambarano called as he drove away. They arranged to meet in Antonio’s parking lot. There, he handed off the $50,000, taking $4,000 for himself, he said.

Ciresi said he never discussed delivering the money with Baccari.

Ciresi described being shocked when the councilmen were arrested. “I was completely taken aback by who the council people were that was involved because I didn’t really know who was involved,” he said. “And then to find out that [Councilman Paul] Caranci had worn a wire and that Zambarano had been doing all this talking to him was — it was a shock, you know.”

He and Baccari saw each other by chance at Capriccio restaurant, he said. “Well, it was just that we were completely upset … about what was going on, and naturally I was concerned about being charged because my name was coming up, and that was the extent of our conversation.”

Did Baccari ever ask if Ciresi would testify against him, McAdams asked. “That did come up, yeah. I just had a reputation that I was a person that would be a standup person, you know, I was involved in criminal law all my career so people trusted me. Defendants trusted me that I would uphold my attorney/client relationship.”

McAdams asked if he understood that that privilege didn’t cover communication that involves criminal conduct. Ciresi said he understood.

Lawyers for Baccari have argued the indictment should be dismissed because prosecutors had presented “materially false” information to the grand jury, namely a statement by Zambarano alleging that he and Ciresi discussed obtaining a bribe from Baccari before they went to his office.

They assert that prosecutors knowingly presented Zambarano’s false account to the grand jury because they want to argue that both Ciresi and Baccari knew Zambarano would ask for a bribe before the meeting.

Baccari had no expectation for any discussion about a payoff, Baccari’s lawyers argue. When Zambarano encountered Baccari, they say, the councilman extorted him for a bribe.

Prosecutors responded in papers filed Tuesday that “at bottom” Baccari had identified a “potential inconsistency between two pieces of evidence, both of which were submitted to the grand jury for its consideration, and which the defendants will have ample opportunity to explore at trial.”

“Even assuming … that Baccari did not have foreknowledge that he would be solicited for a bribe, he is still guilty of the offense charged because ultimately he agreed to pay the bribe and in fact did pay the bribe,” they wrote. Inconsistencies in evidence are not reason for dismissal of indictments, they say.

Baccari’s lawyer, Anthony M. Cardinale, could not be reached for comment late Tuesday.